RFR: 7165755 OS Information much longer on linux than other platforms

[David Holmes]

Hi Nils,

On 11/05/2012 11:45 PM, Nils Loodin wrote:
> And, to be clear, I updated a few lines after the conversation with
> David. Here's the lastest:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~nloodin/7165755/webrev.03
> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~nloodin/7165755/webrev.0>

I'm okay with this change. Do you have a second reviewer for this final 
format?

> Also, David, could you sponsor my push if you're happy?

Where are you pushing to? hotspot-rt?

I can do the push once my home directory server comes back online :(

And once I see a second reviewer.

Thanks,
David


> Dear regards,
> Nils Loodin
>
> On May 11, 2012, at 14:07 , Nils Loodin wrote:
>
>> Lists accidentally dropped of here.
>>
>> For the official record, Davd Holmes, are you hereby happy with the
>> state of my changes and ready to stand by that as an official reviewer? :)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nils Loodin
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> *From: *David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com
>>> <mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com>>
>>> *Subject: **Re: RFR: 7165755 OS Information much longer on linux than
>>> other platforms*
>>> *Date: *May 11, 2012 12:52:12 GMT+02:00
>>> *To: *Nils Loodin <nils.loodin at oracle.com
>>> <mailto:nils.loodin at oracle.com>>
>>>
>>> On 11/05/2012 5:22 PM, Nils Loodin wrote:
>>>>> Missed one:
>>>>>
>>>>> 39 #include "os_linux.hpp"
>>>>>
>>>> Gah. Indeed.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we want the initial st->print("OS:") on the brief info the way we
>>>>> have on the full info?
>>>> I judged no, due to the fact that this would (well in our case anyway,
>>>> but I thought generally) be used by other tools to get a brief info.
>>>> They would then have that string as a label in a gui, or something else.
>>>> Or if they want to print somewhere, they should print that string on
>>>> their own.
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>>
>>>> About OS_xx.cpp including OS_xx.hpp, I feel I'm missing something.. can
>>>> you please help me say why that's a no-no? And what does it have to do
>>>> with the old included implementation?
>>>
>>> It isn't that it is wrong, it's that it hasn't been necessary. So I
>>> was wondering why it was now necessary, as if it had been necessary I
>>> would have expected it to be done when the old include system got
>>> converted. I think these files only need include the generic os.hpp
>>> and that it turn will include the platform specific ones.
>>>
>>>> Changing the above, are you ok with the changes?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> Though we should probably be having this conversation on the open
>>> lists ;-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Nils Loodin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>